User talk:Tatie2189

Commercial use of Image:Aerial photo MAS.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Aerial photo MAS.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Aerial photo MAS.jpg is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Aerial photo MAS.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Aerial photo MAS.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Aerial photo.jpg. The copy called Image:Aerial photo.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 04:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:MAS_Aerial.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MAS_Aerial.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:MAScrest2007.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:MAScrest2007.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little context in Kings Christian Church

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Kings Christian Church, by Useight, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Kings Christian Church is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Kings Christian Church, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Kings Christian Church itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 06:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alun Davies (pastor)

A tag has been placed on Alun Davies (pastor), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ROGER ^TALK 11:23, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:102 2069.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:102 2069.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:AOG Australia Logo.gif

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:AOG Australia Logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hillsonglogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hillsonglogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Child sex offender

Frank Houston co-founder of Hillsongs church is a known child sex offender. It is obvious from your contributions that you support Hillsongs or are a member. Are you denying that this happened? Wikipedia articles are to be neutral and have all sides shown. That the co founder of the church had sex with a boy is something cannot be just covered up. If this was an article about the Jehovah's Witnesses, would you think that it was fair if the co founder was a pedophile and yet members saw that information as not relevant? I have reverted it. Please re-consider your deletion of the link and think of the poor teenage boy who was abused by this monster. Would you agree that he was a sick man? Sapienz 12:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

1. Frank Houston did not found Hillsong Church, he founded the church (Sydney CLC) that is now under Brian Houstons leadership. 2. He may have been a "known child sex offender" (in your words), but there was never any criminal conviction. So you cannot add that he was a Convicted pedophile to an article as it is a false claim, and does not fit an opening paragraph as it has a large amount of opinion and bias. 3. Yes I am a member of Hillsong church, what's that got to do with it. Is it because I am Pentecostal? Is it besuase of some sort of dislike or hatred you have towards my church? 4. I am not denying that it did happen, but I will point out that you are blowing it out of proportion by making un-verified statements and adding person opinion to what is meant to be a neutral and factual page. 5. Pedophilic acts to not equate to "sex with a boy", whether it happened or not, it cannot be proved so don't claim it here. Save it for an internet blog or chat room. 6. I have no hatred towards Jehovah's Witnesses, and would never go out of my way to "abuse" and "bully" them with any kind of info. Information and references are to build an article, not to turn it into a personal attack. 7. I will think of the boy you claimed was abused, it is a sad thing to happen if it did. I do not condone that kind of behaviour. 8. Whether he was a "sick man" or not, Wikipedia articles must not reflect personal opinions but must contain verified references and statements.

Please do not hesitate to ask any questions about this or writing Wikipedia artciles, I am more than happy to help. The most important thing here is that these articles are reflective of factual information and not of personal opinion.

Thank you for your time.Tatie2189 15:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ps. if you continue to make changes that are not discussed with and approved by other edits, you will be officialy warned for vandalism, per WP:VAN.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Print logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Print logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AustralianChristianChurches.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AustralianChristianChurches.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 14:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem with Assemblies of God in the United Kingdom

The 'History' and 'Mattersey Hall' sections you added to the Assemblies of God in the United Kingdom article appears to have been copied from [1] and [2] respectively. If permission is granted by the copyright holders (see WP:COPYREQ) then this material can be included, although it may be easier just to rewrite the section in your own words. Duncan Keith 12:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CccLogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:CccLogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hillsintleadcollege.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hillsintleadcollege.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PCC-Logo-Transparent-3.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:PCC-Logo-Transparent-3.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SCC-Websitevz 01.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:SCC-Websitevz 01.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List of praise and worship songs

Hi. I've raised a question regarding the validity and the necessity for the list of praise and worship songs as it doesn't seem to be adding any real value to Wikipedia. Since you're the creator and one of the significant contributors to the list, I thought I'd notify you. Please feel free to state your views on the discussion page. Thanks! aJCfreak yAk 14:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of praise and worship songs

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of praise and worship songs, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? aJCfreak yAk 00:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Charismatic Wikipedians

I've proposed to rename the user category Category:Charismatic Wikipedians. Since you are listed a member, you may be interested in participating in the discussion.--Tikiwont (talk) 13:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:HSJam2006.JPG

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:HSJam2006.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Radiant chains (talk) 10:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shirelive Church

hey i noticed you have been editing alot of church articles, any chance i could get a bit of help? User:Bunzyfunzy/Shirelivechurch every time i put this up it seems to get deleted and now the name has been blocked. Can you suggest or make any improvements so this fits in with wikipedias rules thanks Bunzyfunzy (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

nice work on the ACC content on Wiki, i made slight edits to update number of church and total attendees :) love your work! Jimvegas (talk) 00:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of One (Hillsong United EP)

The article One (Hillsong United EP) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet WP:NALBUMS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:30, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of One (Hillsong United EP) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article One (Hillsong United EP) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One (Hillsong United EP) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:25, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Aussyg.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aussyg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:08, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Alphacrucis logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Alphacrucis logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use in Australia discussion

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

Proposed deletion of List of contemporary worship songs

The article List of contemporary worship songs has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unsourced and this is better handled by a category as the songs are not being discussed.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:18, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of contemporary worship songs for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of contemporary worship songs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of contemporary worship songs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hillsong International Leadership College for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hillsong International Leadership College is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillsong International Leadership College until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

RexSueciae (talk) 05:19, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Macarthur Anglican School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Macarthur Anglican School, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macarthur Anglican School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Macarthur Anglican School

Hello, Tatie2189,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username CollectiveSolidarity and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started, Macarthur Anglican School, for deletion, because [consensus decision] previously decided that it wasn't suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. If you wish to restore a page deleted via a deletion discussion, please use the deletion review process instead, rather than reposting the content of the page.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|CollectiveSolidarity}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 04:13, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Calvary Christian Church

The article Calvary Christian Church has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No inherent notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]